There’s more. Gas isn’t (usually) the major threat from HFCS. There’s also obesity, heart disease, diabetes, high blood pressure, and blood clotting which may lead to strokes. Worse yet, this isn’t speculation, isolated cases, or just statistics. The mechanisms are known, the numbers are big, and the supporting studies are numerous. Evidence is growing that we should add osteoporosis and the metabolic syndrome (see our August 2000 column) to the list. The average person in the U.S. consumes enough HFCS to put on 35 pounds a year if not burned off. For those who can’t digest it, that’s a major pantsload of gas, diarrhea, and/or cramps.
Statistically, the invention and introduction of HFCS correlates exactly with the onset of our national obesity epidemic. Two town school systems are so convinced that rampant obesity is promoted by high-calorie junk drinks that they have banned soft drinks from sale on campus despite the uproar. Those towns are NYC and LA, with 3,000 schools.
When a widely published (in leading medical journals) British sugar expert, Yudkin, substituted fructose for table sugar in our diets, he found that its fructose content is hands down its major contributor to its established cardiovascular risks. He is dismayed that the USFDA approves HFCS (because it was grandfathered when table sugar was approved) despite other research supporting his research. The FDA admits it has not tested fructose or HFCS.
Fructose is touted as a good sweetener for diabetics because it doesn’t spike their blood sugar, but its impact on their already elevated heart disease risk outweighs its blood sugar benefit. Even with non-diabetics, adding fructose to the usual high-fat (e.g., low-carb) diet jacks up the diet’s inherent heart disease risk even further by increasing cholesterol and triglycerides, by 30-50% in one test.
It doesn’t even stop there. Fructose binds copper, impairing the creation of hemoglobin necessary for transporting oxygen. Copper inhibition and high fructose combine to increase free radicals which contribute to cancer and aging. Fructose also binds proteins during cooking, affecting food’s taste and nutrition. This so-called Maillard reaction also occurs in our bodies, and may be a factor in diabetes and aging.
Should we completely avoid fructose in general or HFCS in particular? No, for two reasons: a) we can’t; the water diet doesn’t work, and b) it’s not a big deal in moderation unless even a small amount ruins our social life. But at the rate the average U.S. citizen is scarfing it up, yeah . . . it’s a big deal, a big reason so many of us are getting so big, a big risk, and a big source of income for our doctors’ big boat payments. If you eat predominantly real foods, avoid large quantities of processed foods, and really cut back on the junk food and drink, you have little to worry about.
In the interest of fair and balanced reporting, we must consider that the Center for Science in the Public Interest (i.e., Nutrition Action Healthletter, Michael Jacobson, the “food nazi”), a very credible organization and a major critic of soft drinks, doesn’t consider HFCS any worse than other sugars. Maybe CSPI is right and the medical journals paraphrased here are wrong, but I’m betting on the journals this time, for now.
And to think we got all the way through this without saying “fart”.
